Re: [SLUG] Florida's Super-DMCA bill

From: Robin 'Roblimo' Miller (robin@roblimo.com)
Date: Mon Mar 31 2003 - 11:47:01 EST


Derek Glidden wrote:

>On Sun, 2003-03-30 at 18:28, steve wrote:
>
>
>
>>It infact allows for legal use these devices of if you are
>>"authorized" or providing a service. I forget the exact wording on
>>
>>
>
>Yep, and anyone want to put money down on how quickly the cable ISPs
>will start charging much more for the cable internet service that
>"authorizes" you to run a firewall?
>

RoadRunner changed the ToS on one of their Ohio systems a year or two
ago and shut off users who were running multiple computers and/or
firewalls on their connections. The state public utilities commission
made them stop it after companies like Netgear, Linksys and Cisco
screamed. Comcast wanted to do something similar in MD but the public
service commission said no. There is also a growing fear that cable
Internet providers may start giving bandwidth preference to some sites
over others now that the FCC has decided that cable ISPs are not common
carriers governed by telco-style regs but are "information delivery
services." It is now legal on the fed level for BrightRoadHomeRunner to
give you fast/easy access to CNN and slow access to MSNBC. Or even
decide to block NewsForge or Slashdot if we say things they don't like.

The state regulatory bodies ar the only thing standing between you and
the cable ISPs. With new laws on the books that let them authorize or
not authorize whatever they want, the only thing keeping the cable ISPs
from treating you horridly is their own sense of ethics. In other words,
nothing.

- Robin



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 17:30:31 EDT